|
The purpose of corrective action is to address performance or behaviors of faculty members who fail to carry out their responsibilities outlined in the Appointment Documents including the appointment letter, current job description(s), and the current Faculty Handbook, or the Employee Handbook, University Honor Code, published Life University, college, or department policies and/or procedures, or to address behaviors implicating non-compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972. The University reserves the right to begin the performance improvement process at any level. Under appropriate circumstances, suspension may be immediate. The form of discipline depends on the circumstances, including performance, attendance and behavior issues. Elements of the corrective action procedures shall also apply where a faculty member has been found “responsible” for a University policy violation.
There are two types of corrective action: progressive corrective action and immediate corrective action. The purpose of progressive corrective action is to provide a progressively administered sequence of remedial measures, where appropriate, to improve professional conduct and, if necessary, to provide a procedure for discipline or discharge. The purpose of immediate corrective action is to remedy a problematic situation where progressive corrective action is inappropriate. Immediate corrective action may bypass any level of progressive corrective action when needed.
In all corrective actions, respect for procedures will be a guiding principle.
1.1 Actions leading to Progressive Corrective Action
Actions by a faculty member that may be subject to corrective action include but are not limited to:
• abuses of necessary absences and other leaves
• neglect of duties as detailed in the documents described in paragraph one, above
• an “Improvement Plan” that remains unresolved at the end of the prescribed time
• multiple evaluation outcomes indicating “needs improvement” in the faculty member’s evaluation that remain unresolved
• inappropriate behavior toward others in the University
• deficiencies in professional conduct
• violation of University or College policies, regulations, or administrative directives or University Honor Code
1.2 Progressive Corrective Action
When progressive corrective action is appropriate, the University will provide three levels of progressive corrective action for matters that do not implicate non-compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972: Written Warning, Final Written Warning, and Sanction.
The faculty member’s supervisor will consult with the faculty member’s Dean before each level of progressive corrective action is applied to the faculty member.
1.2.1 Levels of Progressive Corrective Action
The following sections describe the three levels of the process of progressive corrective action:
Level One: Written Warning
The supervisor will inform the faculty member in writing in clear and concise terms of the problematic issue(s), what is required to correct those issues and the consequences for failure to correct the issues within a specified period of time.
This written warning will be included on an Employee Counseling form, dated and signed by both parties and placed in the faculty member’s official faculty personnel file. The employee signature is intended only to acknowledge receipt of the notice; it does not imply agreement or disagreement with the notice itself. If the employee refuses to sign, the supervisor/manager will be asked to initial the form indicating that the employee received a copy of the form.
The faculty member may respond to the written warning in writing and that response will be included with the employee counseling form in the personnel file in Human Resources.
Level Two: Final Written Warning
If the faculty member fails to take the corrective measures outlined in the written warning and within the specific period of time, if conduct similar to that occurring at Level One recurs, or if the faculty member engages in other problematic conduct, the faculty member will be given a final written warning. The final written warning sets forth a clear and concise statement of the specific acts or omissions that constitute the reasons for corrective action, the specific actions the faculty member must take to correct these acts or omissions, and a full explanation of the possible consequences if correction does not occur and does not occur during the specified period.
This final written warning will be included on an Employee Counseling form, dated and signed by both parties and placed in the faculty member’s official faculty personnel file. The employee signature is intended only to acknowledge receipt of the notice; it does not imply agreement or disagreement with the notice itself. If the employee refuses to sign, the supervisor/manager will be asked to initial the form indicating that the employee received a copy of the form.
The faculty member may respond to the final written warning in writing and that response will be included with the employee counseling form in the personnel file in Human Resources.
Level Three: Sanction
If the faculty member fails to resolve the issues that led to Levels One and Two, the University will initiate a sanction. The sanction may include any of the following: suspension with or without pay, termination, or another appropriate sanction.
The following procedures will be followed when a sanction is imposed on a faculty member:
1. Written Notice:
a. The Supervisor will provide the faculty member with written notice of the sanction. The notice must contain a statement of the specific acts or omissions upon which the sanction is based. It will also include a statement of the faculty member’s right to respond to and/or to appeal the sanction.
b. This notice of sanction will be on an employee counseling form, dated and signed by both parties and placed in the faculty member’s official faculty personnel file. The employee signature is intended only to acknowledge receipt of the notice; it does not imply agreement or disagreement with the notice itself. If the employee refuses to sign, the supervisor/manager will be asked to initial the form indicating that the employee received a copy of the form.
c. The written notice will be presented to the faculty member by personal delivery from the supervisor if available, or by certified delivery, return receipt requested, to the person’s last known address.
2. Response by Faculty Member:
a. The faculty member will have five days from the date of receipt (or failure to accept delivery) of the notice in which to make a written response and/or written request for an appeal of the sanction.
b. If the faculty member does not appeal the sanction within five days, the University will apply the sanction. If the faculty member appeals, any sanction of suspension or termination will be postponed until a final decision is rendered, unless extraordinary circumstances require that the faculty member remain off campus until the appropriate inquiry is completed, in which case the faculty member will continue to receive their salary until a final decision is rendered.
3. Record of Action
a. A record of any corrective action, regardless of level, will be placed in the faculty member’s official faculty personnel file in Human Resources. The faculty member has the right to respond in writing to any written document recording corrective action imposed at Levels One through Three and the response will be attached to the corrective document and placed in the personnel file in Human Resources.
1.3 Instances for Immediate Corrective Action
There are circumstances in which the University may initiate immediate corrective action, when a faculty member has failed to carry out their responsibilities outlined in the appointment documents including the letter of appointment, current job description(s) and the current Faculty Handbook, as well as the University Honor Code, published Life University, college, or department policies and/or procedures, the Employee Handbook, or for behaviors implicating non-compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, and may bypass any or all levels of progressive corrective action. The faculty member’s supervisor will consult with the Dean, and the Dean will consult with the CAO before immediate corrective action is applied to the faculty member.
1.3.1 Corrective action prior to dismissal or other sanction is not required within the faculty member’s first twelve months of employment at the University.
1.3.2 Progressive corrective action prior to dismissal is not required when the University finds that the faculty member engages in any of the following behaviors:
• Conduct which could be prejudicial to the University or damaging to its reputation, such as conviction of a crime or conduct involving moral turpitude. (Conviction will include a plea of guilty or a plea of nolo contendere)
• “Found responsible” for a Title IX policy violation
• Material breach of University regulations, rules, policies or procedures
• Willful misconduct
• Subversion
• Harassment
• Insubordination
• Incompetence
• Willful neglect of duties
• Unprofessional conduct
• Falsification of records
• Conflict of interest with university operations
1.4 Consideration for Suspension with Pay
In extraordinary circumstances, the University may determine that it would be in the best interest of the University and/or the faculty member for the faculty member to leave campus until a decision can be made about whether progressive corrective action or immediate corrective action is appropriate. Under these circumstances, the University has the right to bypass any or all three levels of progressive corrective action and to suspend the faculty member with pay while an investigation takes place.
1.5 Appeals to the Chief Academic Officer or Designee
In cases where corrective action results in a sanction, the faculty member may submit a written appeal to the chief academic officer if the appeal criteria outlined below are met. The faculty member will deliver the appeal to the chief academic officer by personal delivery or certified delivery, return receipt requested, or email within five working days of receipt of notification of the sanction. Appropriate extensions of time will be provided to a faculty member who is unavoidably prevented from adhering to the timelines stated in this section. In this case the CAO will decide if the faculty member was unavoidably prevented from adhering to the timelines.
Appeal Criteria. Appeals shall be considered in the following circumstances:
i. Real or perceived procedural irregularity that affected the outcome of the matter
ii. Newly discovered evidence that could affect the outcome of the matter
iii. Title IX personnel had conflict of interest or bias that affected the outcome of the matter.
iv. Termination
v. Other applicable criteria
The appeal shall include:
1. a statement of reasons for the appeal, specifically outlining which appeal criterion(a) is/are met
2. evidence of a procedural error, or that a decision was disproportionate, arbitrary, and/or capricious, or new evidence
3. the remedy sought
The chief academic officer will, if in their opinion appeal criteria are met, forward the appeal to the Faculty Senate President and Chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee within three days of receipt of the appeal and notify the appellant and supervisor.
Within ten days of receiving the appeal, the Faculty Affairs Committee will request written or oral statements from all applicable parties (depending on which form of presentation is preferred by each) with regard to the sanction.
Faculty Affairs Committee Determinations
Within 10 days of receiving the written or oral statements the Chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee will select three faculty members from the committee to serve with the chair to consider the appeal of the sanction. When selecting members of the panel to hear the appeal the Chair will avoid potential or perceived conflicts of interest by selecting committee members who are not personal friends of, serve in the same department as, or have had strong public disagreements with the appellant. All panel members must disclose any perceived or potential conflicts of interest, and the Chair of the committee will determine if those conflicts preclude a committee member from serving on the panel.
1. The panel members will have up to seven days to gather and review data/information, come to consensus, and provide a recommendation as to whether there is adequate cause for further action and what that action should be. The actions recommended by the panel will be to uphold the action,
2. Take action but recommend a different action,
3. recommend reversing the action.
This recommendation will be given in writing to the appellant and the Chief Academic Officer. The recommendation of the Faculty Affairs Committee is not binding upon the CAO.
Administrative Steps
Chief Academic Officer’s Decision
Within seven days of the receipt of the recommendation from the Faculty Affairs Committee, the Chief Academic Officer will respond in writing with his or her decision. The decision will be communicated to the appellant, the supervisor, and the Dean.
Available Actions. The CAO or designee is limited to taking one of the following actions:
1. Affirm the finding(s) of fact and accept recommended by the Faculty Affairs Committee.
2. Affirm the finding(s) of fact but modify the sanction(s) or recommendations from the Faculty Affairs Committee.
3. Remand the sanction and/or recommendations for a new review by a sub-committee of the Faculty Affairs Committee and meet with the original sub-committee of the FA committee to explain the reasons for disagreement with the original findings.
a. A new committee of three (3) new/different FA members will be assigned to review.
b. The FA Committee will have 10 days from meeting date with the CAO to submit recommendation(s).
The CAO will then consider all information provided and make a final decision. The CAO will communicate the decision within 7 days from receipt of the finding from the new FA committee and the faculty member.
The chief academic officer’s decision is final, except in cases where the sanction is dismissal, in which case it may be appealed to the President. If the chief academic officer fails to meet the time limits prescribed in this section, the appellant may appeal the decision to the President.
Appeal to the President
Upon notification of a decision of dismissal for cause from the Chief Academic Officer (CAO), the appellant may appeal in writing to the President of the University. The appeal must be submitted within ten working days from receipt of notification from the chief academic officer. The President will upon receipt of the appeal review the action taken. The President may:
1. affirm the chief academic officer’s decision
2. modify the action taken
3. reverse the chief academic officer’s decision
The President will communicate his or her decision in writing within twenty working days from receipt of the appeal. The decision will be communicated to the following recipients: the appellant, the Dean and the Chief Academic Officer. Such action will be the final action of the University. There is no appeal.
1.7 Academic Freedom
Corrective action will not be used to restrain faculty members in the exercise of academic freedom.
Title IX Procedures
2. Where the Issues Alleged Implicate Non-compliance with Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972.
3. When a Faculty Member is implicated in a Title IX matter, that is, where a formal charge has been issued pursuant to the Life University Sexual Misconduct and Gender-Based Harassment Policy, that policy controls subsequent steps.
4. The Title IX process is delineated in the Policy and is supervised by the Title IX Coordinator. All parties participating in the Title IX process has the right, under federal law, to a fair and impartial process.
5. When the Title IX Coordinator determines that the issues presented warrant a hearing:
a. The Title IX Hearing Panel makes the determination as to whether or not the charged party is “Responsible” or “Not Responsible” for the alleged conduct. The determination is made based upon the ‘Clear and Convincing Evidentiary Standard’ and by a majority vote of the Panel. The Title IX Coordinator is the person best professionally situated to recommend sanctions for findings of Responsibility. The Title IX Coordinator recommends appropriate sanctions to the Panel after considering what has been issued as a sanction for the same behavior in the past and also based upon what are nationally acceptable sanctions for the same conduct.
b. When faculty members are involved in a case, the Title IX Coordinator will consult with the Dean before recommending a sanction. This is because the faculty member has specific rights and represents a unique demographic on campus. It is believed that in consideration of fairness, the advice and recommendation of the Dean will be useful in determining the most fair and appropriate sanction. This consultation has no bearing on the finding of “Responsible” or “Not Responsible,” it will only help to inform a sanction in the event of a finding of Responsibility.
c. Pursuant to the Life University Sexual Misconduct and Gender-Based Harassment Policy, any party to a Title IX process and Hearing has the right to Appeal based upon one of the four Appeal Criteria, and the following procedure:
6. An appeal must be submitted in writing and must be received by the Title IX Coordinator within five (5) business days of the date of notification of the findings of the Hearing Panel. An extension to this deadline may be granted at the sole discretion of the Title IX Coordinator. The Title IX Coordinator shall then refer the appeal to the appellate officer.
7. A decision on an appeal may not be rendered until the filing deadline has passed. Appellate decisions should be rendered, and proper written notification provided to the Title IX Coordinator no later than ten (10) days after the filing deadline. The Title IX Coordinator shall notify all parties as appropriate of the results of the appeal.
a. Appellate Officer. The appellate officer shall not be the Chief Academic Officer when a faculty member is involved. The Appellate Officer will be chosen by the Title IX Coordinator from a panel of trained University administrators who do not have a conflict.
b. Appeal Criteria. Appeals shall be considered only in the following circumstances:
i. Procedural irregularity that affected the outcome of the matter
ii. Newly discovered evidence that could affect the outcome matter
iii. Title IX personnel had conflict of interest or bias that affected the outcome of the matter.
c. Available Actions. The appellate officer is limited to taking one of the following actions for each party:
i. Affirm the finding(s) of fact and sanctions imposed by the Hearing Panel.
ii. Affirm the finding(s) of fact but modify the sanction(s) imposed.
iii. Remand the complaint for a new hearing before a new hearing.
8. Under no circumstances shall the appellate officer supplant the function of the Hearing Panel; the appellate process exists solely to review the procedures used in the proceedings, and not to re-hear a complaint in its entirety.
Appeal to the President
Upon notification of a decision of dismissal, the appellant may appeal in writing to the President of the University. The appeal must be submitted within ten working days from receipt of notification from the Title IX Coordinator. The President will upon receipt of the appeal review the action taken. The President may
• affirm the decision
• modify the action taken
• reverse the decision
The President will communicate his or her decision in writing within twenty working days from receipt of the appeal. The decision will be communicated to the following recipients: the faculty member, Title IX Coordinator, Dean, and the Chief Academic Officer. Such action will be the final action of the University. There is no appeal.
|